Advertisement

foolishness of passivity

topic posted Fri, November 18, 2011 - 3:52 PM by  Elo
Share/Save/Bookmark
There is another thread going on about the loss of lives, particularly children, in the revolutions of Libya and Egypt, making the implication that these revolutions are too costly.

Beside the obvious point that there is a high cost of inaction I'im wondering if the same people like Tandy who think Libyans or Egyptians should have just laid down and allowed Mubark and Gadaffi to walk all over them and destroy there lives and that of there children, also think we in the western world should have lane down to Hiltler and the fascists in the second world war and allowed him to murder and destroy the lives of people in this world.
posted by:
Elo
offline Elo
London
Advertisement
  • Re: foolishness of passivity

    Fri, November 18, 2011 - 3:59 PM
    might be a difference in the dynamics of the revolution here: take libya for example, where the revolution might lead to a civil war, or even an Islamist take over. Under such circumstances things could prove worse than the devil they knew

    • Re: foolishness of passivity

      Fri, November 18, 2011 - 4:04 PM
      One never knows if a revolution is going to be successful in achieving it's goals of freedom and Democracy, it is no excuse for not trying.
      • Re: foolishness of passivity

        Fri, November 18, 2011 - 4:25 PM
        • Re: foolishness of passivity

          Fri, November 18, 2011 - 4:53 PM
          if anything is a platitude its your attitude the epic struggle of the past 400 years struggle for freedom that is currently still going on in the Middle east.

          i think this description <the quality or state of being flat, dull, or trite> describes your attitude to the Arab Spring quite well.
          • Re: foolishness of passivity

            Fri, November 18, 2011 - 4:57 PM
            fighting for fundamentalism isn't struggling for freedom
            • Re: foolishness of passivity

              Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:24 PM
              <<fighting for fundamentalism isn't struggling for freedom

              Sorry, but the Arab spring thusfar has not been defined by those seeking fundamentalism in place of Democracy.
              • Re: foolishness of passivity

                Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:42 PM
                <Sorry, but the Arab spring thusfar has not been defined by those seeking fundamentalism in place of Democracy.>

                you know Im sure Dustin's opinions didn't used to be this way out and unbalanced as Tandys and Eriks, to make this claim when Obama, France and Britain spent loads of energy and time trying to establish what their aims were, sent in there secret services to work overtime, sent in all there top diplomats and then committed and spent billions and risked pilots lives in helping them, at considerable political capital.

                Hilarious. Sure, they may have been SOME fundamentalist in there somewhere but to make this claim that most of them were working for a Fundamentalist state - oh so Dustin spotted this and the CIA, Obama, David Cameron and the president of France missed it. Amazing !

                If he keeps up with this standard I'm going to have to put him on the dont bother list, which is a pitty Jeff as others dont post so much and me and you mostly agree !

                oh for the good old days of Tribe about three years ago !
                • Re: foolishness of passivity

                  Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:43 PM
                  and just to clarify that above im talking about Libya and Egypt as we have mostly been doing in this and other threads, i know its more complicated in places like Yemen.
                • Re: foolishness of passivity

                  Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:46 PM
                  Yet, I can cite actual evidence supporting my view, while you can play with your lower lip and fart
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: foolishness of passivity

                    Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:19 PM
                    < play with your lower lip and fart>

                    a strange combination of actions and things you dwell on.

                    what evidence do you have that the Libyan revolutions has been taken over by Fundamentalism and that of Egypt ?
    • Re: foolishness of passivity

      Fri, November 18, 2011 - 4:13 PM
      i think thats for them people to decide, not Tandy or you. There is nothing wrong with a Civil war if your trying to fight off people like Gadaffi and his goons.

      The fact is the English Civil war which was trying to throw of the tyranny of monarchy failed had massive set backs and had some negative results before it resulted in progress many years later.

      The French Revolution started off with good intentions but went bad. The American war of Independence went a bit better.

      But the fact is if non of them people and others like them had taken the risk and tried we would be certain to be living in dictatorship everywhere now and the world would be a LOT darker.

      Again you guys are completely complacent about the blood sweat toil and tears that have been shed in the past for your freedoms and progress, its unlikely its going to be much easier for the Libyans and Egyptians to obtain there freedom, which is all the more reason that its stupid to tell them not to even bother trying.

      • Re: foolishness of passivity

        Fri, November 18, 2011 - 4:29 PM
        "i think thats for them people to decide, not Tandy or you. There is nothing wrong with a Civil war if your trying to fight off people like Gadaffi and his goons. "


        what point does the above even serve, and how does it actually address my previous remarks?



        "But the fact is if non of them people and others like them had taken the risk and tried we would be certain to be living in dictatorship everywhere now and the world would be a LOT darker. "

        the entire point I just made was that people might be fighting for something *worse* than dictatorship


        "Again you guys are completely complacent about the blood sweat toil and tears that have been shed in the past for your freedoms and progress"

        and maybe you just like dead babies: see, I can make stupid accusations, as well~!!!




        • Re: foolishness of passivity

          Fri, November 18, 2011 - 4:46 PM
          <the entire point I just made was that people might be fighting for something *worse* than dictatorship >

          cant you understand the obvious point i was making that when western democracy was achieved over about a 300 year period, many lost there lives fighting hard for it with also risk of failure and sometimes indeed they got something worse.

          yet would you have suggested to them also to not bother trying ?

          <"Again you guys are completely complacent about the blood sweat toil and tears that have been shed in the past for your freedoms and progress" >

          you and Tandy are so half hearted about the value of trying for freedom if there are risks involved that it follows that your complacent about the efforts that were put in to obtain your own.
          • Re: foolishness of passivity

            Fri, November 18, 2011 - 4:57 PM
            "cant you understand the obvious point i was making that when western democracy was achieved over about a 300 year period, many lost there lives fighting hard for it with also risk of failure and sometimes indeed they got something worse. "

            Elo, if people are fighting for something, actually achieving it isn't a failure. We're talking about people actively fighting for a fundamentalist state, which isn't actually likely to be a beneficial trade-off for dictator ship. in fact, it might be worse


            "you and Tandy are so half hearted about the value of trying for freedom if there are risks involved that it follows that your complacent about the efforts that were put in to obtain your own. "

            lol, it's like talking to a wall
            • Re: foolishness of passivity

              Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:18 PM
              < actually achieving it isn't a failure>

              The English Civil war set out to throw of the dictatorship of the king and achive democracy yet ended in many years with Cromwell and dictatorship. The French Revolution sought liberation and equality yet in the short term got tyranny instead.

              Yet like the Revolution in America all of these movements were the start of modern freedom and democracy.

              In all of these movement and others like them nobody ever hand any gurantees of success.

              Yet you seem to say they shouldnt even have bothered unless success was guranteeed.

              < We're talking about people actively fighting for a fundamentalist state>

              lol, WTF, you may be but Im not, the AIMS of the Libyans and Egyptians were clearly stated many times in the revolutions months back, most did not say they were fighting for a fundamentalist state.

              Whether they achieve there aims or not is another issue, but its clear what the aims of those who started these revolutions were in the main.

              <it's like talking to a wall >

              oh, head going to explode again because i dont agree ?
              • Re: foolishness of passivity

                Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:25 PM
                <<lol, WTF, you may be but Im not,

                This is exactly why we end up talking past each other, many of these arguments exist only in certain peoples heads.
                • Re: foolishness of passivity

                  Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:30 PM
                  yeh i know but in that sentence i think he gives away why we will never agree - he will never see the Arab Spring as a movement for democracy just a bunch of dodgy people trying to get a fundamentalist state, maybe if they achieve Sweden 10 years after that Dustin might change his mind, but before he has already made up his mind.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: foolishness of passivity

                    Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:37 PM
                    "yeh i know but in that sentence i think he gives away why we will never agree - he will never see the Arab Spring as a movement for democracy just a bunch of dodgy people trying to get a fundamentalist state"

                    Elo, I know you will never be able to comprehend this, in any intelligent manner, but I fully recognize that the people who started the movement were liberal democrats. However, I recognize that they are in a significant minority in the region, and that these movements were hijacked by more fundamentalist elements


                    "maybe if they achieve Sweden 10 years after that Dustin might change his mind, but before he has already made up his mind."

                    or you lack very basic intellectual abilities
                    • Re: foolishness of passivity

                      Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:51 PM
                      < However, I recognize that they are in a significant minority in the region, and that these movements were hijacked by more fundamentalist elements >

                      that wasn't what you said at first, you merely said they were fighting for a fundamentalism state, but just exactly when do you say for example the movement has been hijacked into a fundamentalist state in Libya, or Egypt ?

                      I dont say its not possible, but in Egypt we have the army trying to keep a big chunk of power and they tend to be extremely opposed to fundamentalism, whats more likely is an unwilling tense coalition of ALL forces there first, progressive/liberal/leftists with - Muslim Brotherhood (with the more moderate branchs on the ascent by virtue of they will have to deal with the other two groups mentioned) - and the army.

                      In Libya there will be all kind of mixtures but its ridiculous to say the movement has already been hijacked by fundamentalism, are you claiming fundamentalist are already a majority in power in Libya ?
                      • Re: foolishness of passivity

                        Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:07 PM
                        Elo, the army retaining power, and actively working to minimize influence from fundamentalists isn't actually evidence of a lack of influence from the fundamentalists in the uprising. In fact, it's the exact opposite.

                        "In Libya there will be all kind of mixtures but its ridiculous to say the movement has already been hijacked by fundamentalism, are you claiming fundamentalist are already a majority in power in Libya ? "

                        it certainly seems like it might be the case
                        • Re: foolishness of passivity

                          Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:25 PM
                          < the army retaining power, and actively working to minimize influence from fundamentalists isn't actually evidence of >

                          what it is evidence of that is that the army in Egypt - who are as you acknowledge one of the most powerful groups in that country, will resit more extreme fundamentalist positions to be taken up nationally.

                          then there is the fact that more of the voices ive heard coming directly out of that country have not being taking about fundamentalism states but freedom and democracy.

                          now i certainly agree it would be interesting to see some modern polls done on ideas towards democracy and freedom in Egypt and Libya, i might dig around and see what i can find, polls after the revolution on democracy and freedom. I would be pretty sure there would be majorities wanting to keep democracy.
                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                            Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:38 PM
                            "now i certainly agree it would be interesting to see some modern polls done on ideas towards democracy and freedom in Egypt and Libya, i might dig around and see what i can find, polls after the revolution on democracy and freedom. I would be pretty sure there would be majorities wanting to keep democracy. "

                            they don't even have democracy, and the army isn't offering it


                            "what it is evidence of that is that the army in Egypt - who are as you acknowledge one of the most powerful groups in that country, will resit more extreme fundamentalist positions to be taken up nationally. "

                            and that's your successful revolution in the arab world: a dictatorship that basically stays intact (with only the figurehead changing) that continues to work against the various, violently fundamentalist, ideals of the population?
                            • Re: foolishness of passivity

                              Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:45 PM
                              <and that's your successful revolution in the arab world: a dictatorship that basically stays intact (with only the figurehead changing) that continues to work against the various, violently fundamentalist, ideals of the population>

                              no, not at all, Im talking about a dynamic and changing coaliton between progressive, leftist (trade unions are growing in power), MB, and Military.

                              In Turkey over the last 20 years who won in that fight ? You know one thing you need to know about turkey before Atturks changes it was the center of the Islamic world for a long time, if they changed then there is no reason to suppose a young internet all jezzera informed generation cant change there nations also. Modern Turkey is showing Islam can play in politics and not always come out intolerant and aggressive or non democratic.

                              The army did start out in Turkey keeping the fundamentalist in power and check whilst reluctantly leting in democracy, well its interesting there how the Muslim moderates are now more progressive than most of the military yet them same Muslim moderate politicians grew out of a more fundamentalist Islam in their recent past.
              • Re: foolishness of passivity

                Fri, November 18, 2011 - 5:34 PM
                "The English Civil war set out to throw of the dictatorship of the king and achive democracy yet ended in many years with Cromwell and dictatorship. The French Revolution sought liberation and equality yet in the short term got tyranny instead. "

                Elo, in this instance there are clearly serious questions if people are actually fighting for democracy


                "lol, WTF, you may be but Im not"

                "lol, WTF, you may be but Im not, the AIMS of the Libyans and Egyptians were clearly stated many times in the revolutions months back, most did not say they were fighting for a fundamentalist state."

                Elo, the biggest contingent to emerge in Egypt were the fundamentalist, and there are very real fears in Libya of the fundamentalists taking power.

                "Whether they achieve there aims or not is another issue, but its clear what the aims of those who started these revolutions were in the main. "

                who started them is irrelevant. What is relevant is that these people might be fighting to impose something much worse than the current dictators
                • Re: foolishness of passivity

                  Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:05 PM
                  <Elo, the biggest contingent to emerge in Egypt were the fundamentalist, and there are very real fears in Libya of the fundamentalists taking power. >

                  I would like you to recognize that you started off making a clear sweeping statement that the fundamentalist had already won and taken over, or your words at least implied that.

                  There are certainly risks but there are other large power groups your virtually ignoring - ie progressive+military. Thats point 1 especially about Libya.

                  Egypt - i read recently the MB were expected to get only 40% seats and its very premature to call all MB seats fundamentalist when many but not all MB are saying they will keep to a democratic constitution and with the Army already trying to keep onto power and highly likely to block any real fundamentalist Iran/Saud style takeover attempts from the MB. You can look at it that the MB are most powerful, but you could also look at it that 60% of seats might not be theres and that the Army also would join that 60% in resisting an all out islamic state. And all out is the point as well as we may get a very mild Islamic influenced type state much more like Turkey than Saudi or Iran.

                  Your simplistic stance that the revolution is already lost and freedom gone is premature in its negativity. We have to see.

                  Just months into the English, American and French revolutions positive outcomes were no more likely. Yet it was the trying that brought in progress in spite of some failures, generaly at least in the modern world.

                  exactly the same is true of this region at this time in history, there might be some failures but there is very likely to be some success too - if they never try they will never succeed that's for sure, in-spite of the big risks, to not try is a big risk too, and this is one of the best times to try, rapid growth of empowering technology and a huge youth bulge thats rapidly educating itself on this.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: foolishness of passivity

                    Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:16 PM
                    "Egypt - i read recently the MB were expected to get only 40% seats and its very premature to call all MB seats fundamentalist when many but not all MB are saying they will keep to a democratic constitution"

                    the MB isn't the only fundamentalist party of concern. In fact, after the MB, the next big winner is expected to be the the various salafist, parties. After them, it's the NDP, and finally last of all, and all by their lonesome, the liberals.

                    Which is exactly what i have been telling your for months. And predictably, would just illicited mindless outrage from you and Jeff
                    • Re: foolishness of passivity

                      Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:32 PM
                      let me do a little research on that im skeptical of your claims.
                      • Re: foolishness of passivity

                        Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:43 PM
                        Islamist parties will win the most seats in parliamentary elections in Egypt where they were set to take place today, according to an Arabic-language poll conducted on social-networking website Facebook.

                        According to the unofficial poll, which asked voters to choose which party would have their vote in elections, 38 percent of Egyptians would choose the Freedom and Justice Party, the largest and one of the best organized of political parties in Egypt. The party has ties with the Muslim Brotherhood.

                        An additional 12% said they would cast their vote for the rightist Al-Nour party, a Salafi Islamist party.

                        The survey, which polled 38,071 Facebook users at the time of writing, indicated that liberal, secular parties would receive the lowest amount votes. The most popular secular party, the Al-Masreen Al-Ahrar faction, only received 2% of votes.

                        Voters were asked to choose from 10 different options, reflecting only a fraction of the dozens of registered political parties in Egypt.

                        More than a quarter of those polled, 26%, responded that they were unsure which party they would vote for.

                        www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx
                        • Re: foolishness of passivity

                          Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:51 PM
                          ok so according to that one poll - and i am sure there are others, we have aprox 50% Islamic and maybe 50% not, and not all of the MB votes are necessarily Fundamentalist.

                          in addition we have the army trying to prevent islamic strands blocking democracy.

                          There is no reason to suppose what we have had in Turkey the last 10 years we cant have now in Egypt.


                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                            Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:54 PM
                            Uh, that facebook poll is going to actually skew results away from the more Conservative elements of egyption society, just due to the nature of the medium.

                            And yes, the MB is clearly fundamentalist


                            "in addition we have the army trying to prevent islamic strands blocking democracy. "

                            see my comments about your successful revolution of the people
                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                            Mon, November 21, 2011 - 11:39 AM
                            -------There is no reason to suppose what we have had in Turkey the last 10 years we cant have now in Egypt.

                            oh my god. the largest voting block will be fundimentalists and over ninety percent think that its ok to kill people that talk badly about their religion. you really think that will change in ten years? you make up your mind by using your opinion. a positive outlook is not a good way to go to make decisions.

                            -------ive heard many respectable experts on them claiming the opposite,

                            do you even know what the party stands for? have you ever looked? thats like saying that the republicans are not about lowing taxes. you keep talking about violent fundimentalism but what about just being fundimentalist? why do you ignore that?


                      • Re: foolishness of passivity

                        Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:51 PM
                        "According to an Aljazeera public opinion survey, released on July 7, 2011, nearly 50 per cent of those polled indicated first preference for the Muslim Brotherhood, represented by the Freedom and Justice Party. Another 27 per cent expressed support for the Salafist cluster or what is now called Nour Party.."

                        www.islamonline.net/eng/arti...970915244
                        • Re: foolishness of passivity

                          Fri, November 18, 2011 - 6:55 PM
                          <There is no reason to suppose what we have had in Turkey the last 10 years we cant have now in Egypt. >

                          after all not all political strands in Turkey especially 10 years ago were "progressive" either, yet that has been their general direction and political growth towards.
                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                            Fri, November 18, 2011 - 7:06 PM
                            <And yes, the MB is clearly fundamentalist >

                            ive heard many respectable experts on them claiming the opposite, you yourself try to claim most of the whole country are violent fundamentalist so we better treat your claims like that with a bit skepticism.
                            • Re: foolishness of passivity

                              Fri, November 18, 2011 - 7:13 PM
                              uh, if 80% of the muslim population wants to execute people for changing their religion, then they are, indeed, violent fundamentalists.

                              Your inability to accept such facts doesn't speak ill of me
                              • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                Sat, November 19, 2011 - 2:13 AM
                                but your inability to recognize 80% of the population have not been engaged in violent fundamentalism at all over the last six months when they have had many opportutinities to do so and when they were asked to do so by the current military rulers on national state TV shows how your willing to brand people violent fundamentalist in-spite of there actions.

                                your really saying that there OPINION in that one poll should define them more than there actions in the real world, that the real evidence - their actions - should be completely ignored ?

                                I think i have come up with a theory that explains adequetly why we HAVEN'T seen much violent fundamentalism acted out in reality in spite of your poll, you have not, - if there was a Poll in 1400 in Spain during the inquisition a majority might have said the inquisition was acceptable and justified, yet clearly it was not the majority driving the inquistion in Spain.

                                Yet you have not been able to explain at all why this violence has not maninfasted, - your explanation that the police and authorities have stoped them obviously falls short of reality considering for at least a month there was no police and authority and that recently the authorities actual asked them to act like violent fundamentalist - not stop them.

                                All of this reality you ignore in favor of an opinion poll on Shari law. Im not saying your poll is not important or worrying, but it does not trump the actual reality on the ground. Thats obviously the bottom line.

                                Above we are speculating as to how strong fundamentalist elements will be in future seats after the election, again what is the acid test is the reality of what will happen in about 12 months, there actions, many MB candidates are diverse and saying different things and the group is in a state of change, nobody knows for sure what the actions will be in 12 months, probably not even them.

                                But what is most important is what they actualy DO in 12 months time, now what they say, just like your poll.
                                • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                  Sat, November 19, 2011 - 7:58 AM
                                  all these points have been addressed numerous times
                                  • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                    Sun, November 20, 2011 - 4:41 PM
                                    <all these points have been addressed numerous times>

                                    The only explanation i heard you come up was the army is stopping the fundamentalist, in-spite of the fact the army was doing nothing of the kind in Egypt for at least a month and anarchy in Libya for about four months.

                                    this is actually the crux of the whole argument and your ignoring it because you can see the truth in it that the invisible violence you talk of has not materialized even though its had plenty of opportunity to do so - when are you expecting it to come Dustin sometime in the next Century ?


                                    • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                      Sun, November 20, 2011 - 5:13 PM
                                      "The only explanation i heard you come up was the army is stopping the fundamentalist, in-spite of the fact the army was doing nothing of the kind in Egypt for at least a month and anarchy in Libya for about four months.

                                      this is actually the crux of the whole argument and your ignoring it because you can see the truth in it that the invisible violence you talk of has not materialized even though its had plenty of opportunity to do so - when are you expecting it to come Dustin sometime in the next Century ? "

                                      1) the police attacking protesters is not anarchy

                                      2) there was just a huge lair up of violence in egypt

                                      3) They were randomly killing and ethnically cleansing black Africans that entire time in Libya

                                      4) there is a long established trend of sectarian violence in Egypt, despite the authorities trying to prevent it

                                      As I said, all addressed previously.
                                      • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                        Sun, November 20, 2011 - 5:31 PM
                                        <1) the police attacking protesters is not anarchy

                                        2) there was just a huge lair up of violence in egypt >

                                        you were talking about most of Egypts people being violent islamic fundamentalist so what on earth has police violence to do with that ?

                                        <3) They were randomly killing and ethnically cleansing black Africans that entire time in Libya >

                                        this was racily motivated inflamed by Gadaffis use of people from another country and race being shiped in to massacre them. Again it ha nothing to do with the majority of Libyans being Violent Islamic fundamentalist - something there very clearly not.

                                        <4) there is a long established trend of sectarian violence in Egypt, despite the authorities trying to prevent it >

                                        I never said there is no fundamentalist violence, infact i said obviously there is, but where are your statistics to show this is "normal" behavior, ie that the majority of Egyptians are acting out acts of violent fundamentalism ?


                                        As to state violence ive said often on the other Egypt thread that the primary threat to the revolutions ideals is the army now.

                                        So anyway Dustin what is your prediction for over the next 6 - 12 months ? military take over, Islamic fundamentalist take over, or progressive victory ?

                                        You know what mine is ? A power stalemate struggle between the Islamist and military, with a smaller but sginficant toe hold for the progressives to build rapid Internet and Al Jezzera growth out of.

                                        And that some of the progressives and Islamist will start to influence each other and even merge in some cases.

                                        Thats quite similar to the last 20 years in Turkey, only in Egypt it may be condensed into about 6 years because of new media and a faster changing world and demographics.


                                        • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                          Sun, November 20, 2011 - 5:37 PM
                                          <And that some of the progressives and Islamist will start to influence each other and even merge in some cases.>

                                          that second part i think will gradually happen over about 10 years, though obviously some secularist and Islamist will remain miles apart, others will get a lots closer, and follow the immediate stalemate between Islamist and miltarly with the progressives having the toe hold from inside parliament but more importantly outside - on the street, internet and Al Jezzera.


                                        • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                          Sun, November 20, 2011 - 6:31 PM
                                          "you were talking about most of Egypts people being violent islamic fundamentalist so what on earth has police violence to do with that ? "

                                          1) you claimed there was a state of anarchy in egypt, there was not

                                          2) the violence against the copts didn't just happen at the hands of the police, as you very well know


                                          "this was racily motivated inflamed by Gadaffis use of people from another country and race being shiped in to massacre them. Again it ha nothing to do with the majority of Libyans being Violent Islamic fundamentalist - something there very clearly not. "

                                          Elo, the divide between the muslim arabs and black Africans is well established in the region, with the Sudan just being it's recent epicenter. Second, Qaddafi hiring african mercenaries is hardly justification for randomly attacking black people


                                          "I never said there is no fundamentalist violence, infact i said obviously there is, but where are your statistics to show this is "normal" behavior, ie that the majority of Egyptians are acting out acts of violent fundamentalism ? "

                                          I already pointed out the clear distinction between fundamentalists and extremists. Extremists want to act outside of the law, the fundamentalists want to put their beliefs into action through the law.

                                          "As to state violence ive said often on the other Egypt thread that the primary threat to the revolutions ideals is the army now."

                                          1) again, there was no revolution. They simply got rid of a figure head (something Ive been pointing out to you from the beggining

                                          2) while I agree the main threat to democracy being established is the army, and have said so numerous times, it has absolutely nothing to do with what we are currently discussing


                                          "So anyway Dustin what is your prediction for over the next 6 - 12 months ? military take over, Islamic fundamentalist take over, or progressive victory ? "

                                          either it's going to become a dictatorial shit hole, or a fundamentalist shit hole; dependent on how far the army is willing to resist the public.

                                          But I can guarantee you the last people who are going to establish a significant presence will be the progressives. Both the military and fundies have no interest in seeing them gain any real influence

                                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                            Mon, November 21, 2011 - 1:42 AM
                                            <either it's going to become a dictatorial shit hole, or a fundamentalist shit hole; dependent on how far the army is willing to resist the public. >

                                            right so your predicting that in another 6-12 months, we will see soon enough then because this violence and negativity you two are eagerly anticipating just doesn't seem to come for some reason, and the term shit hole i suppose is relative to what we had already before under Mubark, im not expecting democracy on the level of what we have in Sweden, but about what we had in Turkey @ 15/20 years ago.

                                            <They simply got rid of a figure head (something Ive been pointing out to you from the beggining>

                                            simply that ? what about the huge changes in media and media liberalization still going on - that may turn out to be most significant of all in emerging changes over the next 10 years, what about the elections and the fact that something like 6,000 different types of candidates are running ?

                                            Yes already there trying to limit the power the elected Parliament will have in forming the constitution, but on the other hand those forming the constitution are going to be picked from a wide selection of NGO's and civil society, and already them limits are being aggressivly opposed by many and the elections whilst far from perfect are completly different to what Egypt has had before.

                                            A far from perfect system has emerged so far but clearly there is a lot of change other than a new figurehead afloat.

                                            I say Egypt is much more likely to get the place Turkey was @ 15 years ago - when the AKP were moderating and the military were gradually being pushed out of a semi dictatorship postion, than anything close to Iran, Saudi, or an all out military dictatorship like in South America 30 years ago.

                                            <1) you claimed there was a state of anarchy in egypt, there was not >

                                            there was clearly anarchy for about a month in Egypt when there was no police on the streets and the army made no attempt whatever of imposing order. Something you seem intent on ignoring.

                                            <2) the violence against the copts didn't just happen at the hands of the police, as you very well know >

                                            im looking for evidence and statistics that violence was carried out by the majority of Egyptians since its supposed to be "normal" behavior according to Dustin, what estimates and evidence do you have about that violence, does it say it was committed by a majority of the 70 million Muslims ?

                                            Just admit it this invisible violence has not appeared in an really significant way yet other than your mind insipte of the fact it was greatly encouraged by the recent leaders on state TV.

                                            <Qaddafi hiring african mercenaries is hardly justification for randomly attacking black people >

                                            I didnt say it was a justification i said it was the reason which has nothing whatsoever to do with violent Islamic fundamentalism, and do you have an solid statistics and estimates on that violence - again anywhere near the levels to support your claim that this violence is "normal" beahviour, No ? just want to make it up based on the pew poll I guess.

                                            so we can take it that the invisible violence hasnt become real in Libya also in-spite many many long months or complete anarchy ?

                                            "normal behavior" - what a joke, about as balanced as FOX news sometimes.




                                            • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                              Mon, November 21, 2011 - 2:06 AM
                                              "right so your predicting that in another 6-12 months, we will see soon enough then because this violence and negativity you two are eagerly anticipating just doesn't seem to come for some reason, and the term shit hole i suppose is relative to what we had already before under Mubark, im not expecting democracy on the level of what we have in Sweden, but about what we had in Turkey @ 15/20 years ago. "

                                              "eagerly anticipating"? Elo, for someone constantly whining about my insulting tone, you have a real habit of making some rather nasty accusations. And no, it was a dictatorial shit hole under Mubarak and never stopped being one after the "revolution". The army just sacrificed Mubarak so people like you would get all gushy pop a little chubby over them


                                              "simply that ? what about the huge changes in media and media liberalization still going on - that may turn out to be most significant of all in emerging changes over the next 10 years, what about the elections and the fact that something like 6,000 different types of candidates are running ? "

                                              www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx


                                              "A far from perfect system has emerged so far but clearly there is a lot of change other than a new figurehead afloat."

                                              Yes, change without actual "change". Stuff to get gullible people to become complacent on hope, but that really does nothing to address the underlying power structures of the military dictatorship

                                              "there was clearly anarchy for about a month in Egypt when there was no police on the streets and the army made no attempt whatever of imposing order. Something you seem intent on ignoring. "

                                              the army not getting involved with clashes between protesters and police, and allowing people to protest, isn't anarchy. The mechanisms of control were still in place


                                              "im looking for evidence and statistics that violence was carried out by the majority of Egyptians since its supposed to be "normal" behavior according to Dustin, what estimates and evidence do you have about that violence, does it say it was committed by a majority of the 70 million Muslims ? "

                                              Elo, the numbers are irrelevant. What matters is that it was violence tied to sectarian animosity that is measured in an overwhelming number of Egyptian Muslims


                                              "Just admit it this invisible violence has not appeared in an really significant way yet other than your mind insipte of the fact it was greatly encouraged by the recent leaders on state TV. "

                                              Elo, the violence against the copts was significant, and Egypt has a long history of such violence. You having some need to downplay it, or dismiss it, doesn't matter. Especially considering the state actively worked to limit it


                                              "I didnt say it was a justification i said it was the reason which has nothing whatsoever to do with violent Islamic fundamentalism, and do you have an solid statistics and estimates on that violence - again anywhere near the levels to support your claim that this violence is "normal" beahviour, No ? just want to make it up based on the pew poll I guess. "

                                              You mean besides all the reporting coming out of Libya that basically states that it's actually dangerous t be black? Clearly that must not be relevant since it goes against what you want to believe. Also, as I have already pointed out, the Muslim African divide is well documented, even in places like Egypt, where they actively suppress historical research

                                              Secondly, if my argument is based on an academic survey, it's hardly made up


                                              "so we can take it that the invisible violence hasnt become real in Libya also in-spite many many long months or complete anarchy ?"

                                              lol, according to every report on the subject, killing and ethnically cleansing black people is a common occurrence in modern Libya



                                              "Yes already there trying to limit the power the elected Parliament will have in forming the constitution, but on the other hand those forming the constitution are going to be picked from a wide selection of NGO's and civil society, and already them limits are being aggressivly opposed by many and the elections whilst far from perfect are completly different to what Egypt has had before. "

                                              lol, the current proposal is that the military will appoint 80 members of the 100 set to draft the constitution

                                              • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                Mon, November 21, 2011 - 12:54 PM
                                                <Elo, the numbers are irrelevant.> if your going to make a claim that violence is normal behavior for these people numbers and evidence are crucial to support that, you have offered no evidence about violence whatsoever to support your rather bigoted claim that its normal behaviour for Egyptians.

                                                < the violence against the copts was significant,>

                                                Homicide in LA and Chicargo is certainly significant, yet I would never in a million years claim homicide is "normal" American behavior. give me statistics to support your claim that its normal Egyptian behaviour. Without numbers and statitics to support your bigoted claim that its normal behavior then it just bullshit.

                                                <the army not getting involved with clashes between protesters and police, and allowing people to protest, isn't anarchy. The mechanisms of control were still in place >

                                                the mechanisms of control were in place ? the country had completely ground to a hault, nobody was going to work, for awhile the police were nowhere, not even on the street, thats after they had stopped attacking people for no reason other than protesting. They tried to drive them out of the square with about zero success, where was the control ? For days there were pitched battles between police (what was left of them) and the protesters, with for awhile no side clearly wining of having control.

                                                Thats in control ? around 300 people got killed one day, both police/Mubarak released paid ex convicts etc, VS protesters, the army done nothing at all about that, what control are you even talking about ?????

                                                Hundreds of volunteers had to police streets and districts in the suburbs as there was no police to be found, and the army had no intention to try and keep order or control.

                                                The mechanisms of control were in place !!! - Really your a lost cause.
                                                • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                  Mon, November 21, 2011 - 12:55 PM
                                                  <lol, according to every report on the subject, killing and ethnically cleansing black people is a common occurrence in modern Libya >

                                                  more made up waffle without numbers, yes i can see why you would say numbers are not important.
                                                  • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                    Mon, November 21, 2011 - 1:08 PM
                                                    "more made up waffle without numbers, yes i can see why you would say numbers are not important."


                                                    <<<People suspected of having fought for Colonel Mu'ammar al-Gaddafi, in particular black Libyans and sub-Saharan Africans, are at high risk of abuse by anti-Gaddafi forces, Amnesty International said today after witnessing black Libyans being targeted in Tripoli on Monday.

                                                    An Amnesty International delegation visiting the Central Tripoli Hospital witnessed three thuwwar revolutionaries, as the opposition fighters are commonly known, dragging a black patient from the western town of Tawargha from his bed and detaining him. The men were in civilian clothing.

                                                    The thuwwar said the man would be taken to Misratah for questioning, arguing that interrogators in Tripoli “let killers free”.

                                                    Two other black Libyans receiving treatment in the hospital for gunshot wounds were warned by the anti-Gaddafi forces that “their turn was coming”.

                                                    The delegation also witnessed a group of thuwwar beating a man outside the hospital. The man, in distress, was shouting “I am not a fifth columnist”, as al-Gaddafi loyalists are known.

                                                    “Within an hour, Amnesty International witnessed one man being hit and one dragged out of his hospital bed to an unknown fate,” said Claudio Cordone, Senior Director at Amnesty International.

                                                    “We have to fear for what may be happening to detainees out of the sight of independent observers”, he added.>>>

                                                    www.amnesty.org/en/news-an...-2011-08-30


                                                    <<<Now, perhaps partly as a consequence of those reports, perhaps because of underlying racial tensions there anyway, we learned that many black Africans in Libya, both foreign workers and native citizens of the country, had been attacked. During the last two weeks, thousands of black Libyans have gathered in a makeshift camp outside Benghazi. They are far from home and fearful of reprisal from rebel forces. Yesterday we caught up with Reuters journalist Brian Rohan who has been reporting from the camp. This is what he told us.

                                                    BRIAN ROHAN: The camp I visited the other day was a misplaced persons' camp with former residents of a town just outside Misrata, originally 30,000 inhabitants, now a ghost town. They were driven from their homes because of Misratans considered support of Gadhafi's troops.

                                                    MARTIN: Now, the residents of this camp are black Libyan citizens and they are largely from Tawarga, a town known to be loyal to Gadhafi, and Rohan said that many seeking shelter in the camp said that they had been targeted.

                                                    ROHAN: The doctors I spoke with at the camp said that they'd been hearing many of the inhabitants telling stories of beatings, reprisals, vengeance attacks by Misratans who drove them from their home. One young man I spoke with said he had spent weeks traveling around towns in western Libya only to be captured and taken to a house by armed men in western Libya and tortured with beatings by an electrical cable and according to what the doctors say, you know, he's not the only one.

                                                    MARTIN: The human rights group Amnesty International recently released a report on prisoner abuse in Libyan detention centers. In it, they describe rebel forces targeting and detaining both black Libyan citizens and migrants from Sub-Saharan Africa. Joining us now to talk about those findings is Diana El Tahawy of Amnesty International. She was one of the group's investigators in Libya and she's with us now from London. Welcome, thanks so much for joining us.

                                                    DIANA EL TAHAWY: Thank you for having me.

                                                    MARTIN: Now, you just heard Brian Rohan's reports on the situation with citizens from this particular town, Tawarga, and I just wanted to ask what more you may know about their situation and why are they targeted.

                                                    TAHAWY: Well, Amnesty International visited Tawarga in September which was a few weeks after it has been taken by revolutionaries from Misrata. When we went into the town, it was completely deserted, completely abandoned. There were no residents there. Some of the homes had been looted, some had been burned. And the reason is, is because in the minds of Misrata residents and particularly in Misrata anti-Gadhafi fighters, Tawarga is associated with some of the worst violations that happened during the besieging of Misrata. Tawarga was viewed as being loyal to Colonel Moammar Gadhafi as the base of his troops.

                                                    Now, people from Tawarga including regular civilians, even women and children and old men, are at all risk. They're all facing reprisals and revenge attacks. I mean, I myself was in the hospital in Tripoli interviewing an injured Tawarga man back in September and while I was sitting at his hospital bed about three men, including one of them armed from Misrata, barged in and essentially dragged him out allegedly for questioning for war crimes he has committed.

                                                    Now, they had no evidence that he's committed anything. The only thing was that he was a black man from Tawarga and that was enough evidence for them. They didn't have an arrest warrant. They had no right to take him out. The presence of an International Human Rights worker didn't stop them even though I tried to stop them. I tried to speak to the hospital administration. And this is the kind of vulnerability that we've seen a lot in Libya in terms of black Libyans particularly from Tawarga but also from other areas that are seen as loyal to Colonel Gadhafi like - but also Sub-Saharan African nationals.>>>

                                                    www.npr.org/2011/10/20/1...tack-in-libya
                                                    • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                      Mon, November 21, 2011 - 1:13 PM
                                                      <<<While many have hailed the revolt against Muammar Gaddafi's rule in Libya as symptomatic of a nationalistic desire for freedom and equality, there is a dark side to this revolution.

                                                      Many African migrant workers report that they have been attacked by anti-government protesters, after having been mistaken for mercenaries hired by Gaddafi.

                                                      They say that their businesses have been attacked, and residents of Benghazi, an opposition stronghold say they are too afraid to even venture out of their houses.

                                                      Al Jazeera's Jacky Rowland reports from Benghazi, in eastern Libya.>>>

                                                      www.youtube.com/watch

                                                      quote: "no one with black skin is safe"


                                                      • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                        Mon, November 21, 2011 - 1:56 PM
                                                        Still no numbers on violence in Libya then i see - and its telling that you try and convert violence in a conflict because people were being shipped in from another country in choas to massacre them, to an Islamic issue.

                                                        Really there isnt much point debating with this kind of bigotry, whatever the facts without statistics or evidence you will always just blame any kiling in that region on the Muslims regardless of evidence.

                                                        If its true that there is Islamic fundamentalist violence normally in Libya, i guess you have statistics on that which show it before the Arab Spring then do you ?


                                                        <lol, the current proposal is that the military will appoint 80 members of the 100 set to draft the constitution >

                                                        a proposal which is geting more and more intense resistance this week, not to mention the fact that the 80 members are to be selected from pretty respectable non military NGO's, Civic socity groups, womans groups, indpenednt academic and legal experts etc. A few of the liberal parties as actualy support the idea because they see that it will keep the Muslim brotherhood somewhat in check. Of course its not ideal, and it is likely to have to be changed anyway, but to say this is "no change"

                                                        for are start the biggest thing that makes your "no change" thing completely wrong is the fact that the Muslim brotherhood, currently by far the biggest political party in the country is now taking part in elections where as before they were completely banned, thats no change ?


                                                        Egyptians themselves are not surprised at these problems for the revolution, but there not talking in your way either, as the new article i posted said, the revolution is half way and it could go anyway yet. Your description of it is divorced from reality.
                                                        • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                          Mon, November 21, 2011 - 1:58 PM
                                                          as to below if thats your idea of a society under control then i can understand why American cities are as they are regards to violence.

                                                          Say what you want we havnt seen this invisible violence of yours break out properly yet and its very unlikely to do so on a large scale. In other words your talking shit. It really is as simple as that.
                                                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                            Mon, November 21, 2011 - 2:19 PM
                                                            Uhm, I think muslims marching through the street, chanting about "how they are taking their country back" is clearly an instance of such violence breaking out. Not to mention the long simmering sectarian tensions that lead up to the protests to begin with
                                                            • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                              Mon, November 21, 2011 - 3:09 PM
                                                              <<Uhm, I think muslims marching through the street, chanting about "how they are taking their country back" is clearly an instance of such violence breaking out.

                                                              Now marching and chanting = violence? Damn, I guess MLK and Ghandi were violent motherfuckers! :)~
                                                              • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                                Mon, November 21, 2011 - 3:43 PM
                                                                "Now marching and chanting = violence? Damn, I guess MLK and Ghandi were violent motherfuckers! :)~"

                                                                Oh, Jeff, if you only had interest in something more than exercising your petty grudges:

                                                                <<<Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh, reporting from Cairo, said "utter chaos" prevailed in the centre of the capital.

                                                                Rageh said: "It was supposed to be a peaceful protest, demanding that Coptic rights should be fulfilled. But it soon escalated into violence, with people on balconies pelting the demonstrators with stones, clearly disagreeing with the cause of the Coptic demonstrators.">>>

                                                                www.aljazeera.com/news/midd...44870.html

                                                                <<<A number of critics say that Egyptian state television not only failed to calm matters, but actually played a role in aggravating an already tense situation.

                                                                In an unprecedented move, broadcasters on state television at one point called on the Egyptian public to head to Maspero en masse to defend Egyptian soldiers from what they described as "angry Christian protesters".

                                                                Indeed as the night unravelled, vigilante mobs attacked demonstrators fleeing police bullets and tear gas, using machettes, swords and cudgels.>>>

                                                                english.ahram.org.eg/NewsCon...opt.aspx


                                                                <<<At one point, an armored security van sped into the crowd, striking a half-dozen protesters and throwing some into the air. Protesters retaliated by setting fire to military vehicles, a bus and private cars, sending flames rising into the night sky.
                                                                After midnight, mobs roamed downtown streets, attacking cars they suspected had Christian passengers. In many areas, there was no visible police or army presence to confront or stop them.>>>

                                                                www.msnbc.msn.com/id/448360...srhJ8P0sR8

                                                                the remark about chants was to highlight the the attitudes that were fueling the conflict: one of assumed Muslim dominance of society
                                                                • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                                  Mon, November 21, 2011 - 4:15 PM
                                                                  <<Oh, Jeff, if you only had interest in something more than exercising your petty grudges:

                                                                  How does disagreeing with your assertion regarding chanting and marching = excercising a petty grudge? Name calling? That is excercising a petty grudge. Accusing others of being antisemitic? That is excercising a petty grudge. Accusing others of being a drug addict? That is excercising a petty grudge. You might do well to learn this important distinction so that you are not so easily confused in the future.
                                                        • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                          Mon, November 21, 2011 - 2:31 PM
                                                          "Still no numbers on violence in Libya then i see - and its telling that you try and convert violence in a conflict because people were being shipped in from another country in choas to massacre them, to an Islamic issue. "

                                                          uh, if you knew anything about the region, and the traditional Muslim vs black African divide that runs across it, you would know it has it's roots in an "islamic issue". Just see Sudan, the repression of genetic studies in egypt,


                                                          "Really there isnt much point debating with this kind of bigotry, whatever the facts without statistics or evidence you will always just blame any kiling in that region on the Muslims regardless of evidence. "

                                                          there you go, not liking facts and trying to label them bigotry. Sorry, labeling them bigotry will not change the fact that it's dangerous tio be black in Libya right now


                                                          "If its true that there is Islamic fundamentalist violence normally in Libya, i guess you have statistics on that which show it before the Arab Spring then do you ? "

                                                          Again, you had a despotic dictator who exercised a strong degree of control over the people and state. So pointing out there was a clear lack of something is like saying violent prisoners are no longer violent, simply because we kept them in solitary confinement


                                                          "a proposal which is geting more and more intense resistance this week, not to mention the fact that the 80 members are to be selected from pretty respectable non military NGO's, Civic socity groups, womans groups, indpenednt academic and legal experts etc. A few of the liberal parties as actualy support the idea because they see that it will keep the Muslim brotherhood somewhat in check. Of course its not ideal, and it is likely to have to be changed anyway, but to say this is "no change" "

                                                          Elo, the fact that the military would be choosing them clearly shows that *they* would still be in control. In fact, the entire point was of the supra-constitutional principles was to maintain such, during elections


                                                          "for are start the biggest thing that makes your "no change" thing completely wrong is the fact that the Muslim brotherhood, currently by far the biggest political party in the country is now taking part in elections where as before they were completely banned, thats no change ? "

                                                          they participated in elections in 2005, but it did nothing to address the fact that Mubarak, and the military, were clearly in power



                                                          "Egyptians themselves are not surprised at these problems for the revolution, but there not talking in your way either, as the new article i posted said, the revolution is half way and it could go anyway yet. Your description of it is divorced from reality. "

                                                          Elo, Just a few months ago you were claiming that the army was an institution of the people, and wanted democracy, and getting irate when I would point out that the military was the power that enabled Mubarak
                                                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                            Tue, November 22, 2011 - 10:11 AM
                                                            <Again, you had a despotic dictator who exercised a strong degree of control over the people and state. So pointing out there was a clear lack of something is like saying violent prisoners are no longer violent, simply because we kept them in solitary confinement >

                                                            so all you offer as proof of this widespread violence is your belief that they would have been violent if Gadaffi wasn't there- just your opinion - like that's supposed to be some kind of fact or something - what a joke.
                                                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                            Tue, November 22, 2011 - 10:23 AM
                                                            <Elo, the fact that the military would be choosing them clearly shows that *they* would still be in control. In fact, the entire point was of the supra-constitutional principles was to maintain such, during elections >

                                                            thats another hell of an asumption of yours, just because they chose 80 people how do you know that gives them the ability to "control" them, its possible but there taken from a pretty widespread of civic instuations, its also just as possible that the military are doing this to keep the Muslim Bortherhood from dominating the formation of the constitution. Something again to note is that some of the liberal parties have supported this move because of exactly that reason.

                                                            Again your making sweeping judgments and conclusions before you know, most of the best analyst are infact saying they have not one clue which way this is going to go over the next 12 months.

                                                            <they participated in elections in 2005, but it did nothing to address the fact that Mubarak, and the military, were clearly in power >

                                                            actualy it done A LOT - your wrong on that because i heard a couple of good analysts discussing this last year before the revolution.

                                                            Bush had forced a very reluctant Mubark to do them elections, but apparently Mubark was quite confident the MB would kind of fall on there face when exposed by the election process etc, he was proven wrong and immediately after starting panicking, which is why immediately following that he ignored Bush advice and went back to repression, started censoring the media again more than previously and was determined to NOT let the brotherhood take part in the following elections. He also tried to close down any power they would have.

                                                            You could in some ways that was one of the precursors to this Revolution, one of them.

                                                            • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                              Tue, November 22, 2011 - 10:49 AM
                                                              "thats another hell of an asumption of yours, just because they chose 80 people how do you know that gives them the ability to "control" them"

                                                              because they are choosing them.


                                                              "Bush had forced a very reluctant Mubark to do them elections, but apparently Mubark was quite confident the MB would kind of fall on there face when exposed by the election process etc, he was proven wrong and immediately after starting panicking, which is why immediately following that he ignored Bush advice and went back to repression, started censoring the media again more than previously and was determined to NOT let the brotherhood take part in the following elections. He also tried to close down any power they would have. "

                                                              the MB still participated in elections, they just ran as independents after that. Also, Mubarak clearly maintained power in the state (I mean, to even try to argue otherwise is laughable)
                                                • Re: foolishness of passivity

                                                  Mon, November 21, 2011 - 1:05 PM
                                                  "Thats in control ? around 300 people got killed one day, both police/Mubarak released paid ex convicts etc, VS protesters, the army done nothing at all about that, what control are you even talking about ????"

                                                  was the army still present? Again, the army not actively quailing violence does not mean it did not have the means to do so


                                                  "The mechanisms of control were in place !!! - Really your a lost cause. "

                                                  Elo, you not liking facts, and mindlessly arguing some pro-Muslim agenda, regardless of facts, amounts to the exact opposite
                    • Re: foolishness of passivity

                      Sun, November 20, 2011 - 3:44 PM
                      <<And predictably, would just illicited mindless outrage from you and Jeff

                      Typical Dustin exaggeration. Calmly responding to his posts = a Tantrum. Disagreeing with his ideas regarding Isreal = you lack basic intellectual capabilities. It also means you are "disgusting", a "retard", and beneath him. And now he is predicting that any disagreement with his latest assertion is going to elicit "mindless outrage". A bit comical to say the least.
                      • Re: foolishness of passivity

                        Sun, November 20, 2011 - 4:43 PM
                        < A bit comical to say the least.>

                        well they do say abuse is a sure sign that someones losing a debate dont they, frustration at his ideas looking wrong I guess.
                        • Re: foolishness of passivity

                          Mon, November 21, 2011 - 11:13 AM
                          Clearly you are a drug addict that does not care about children dying Elo, that much is clear....*sarcasm*.
                          • Re: foolishness of passivity

                            Mon, November 21, 2011 - 1:02 PM
                            <Clearly you are a drug addict that does not care about children dying Elo, that much is clear.>

                            yeh that ones more Tandy isnt it, she has gotten to new depths recently so im not bothering with her for awhile, i mean must of the stuff coming out now is just too stupid to spend time on.
  • Re: foolishness of passivity

    Sat, November 19, 2011 - 5:29 PM
    --------I'im wondering if the same people like Tandy who think Libyans or Egyptians should have just laid down and allowed Mubark and Gadaffi to walk all over them

    thats about all that you need to know about elos ability to think clearly. i wonder if this is a drug problem or some other kind of issue?

    ------might be a difference in the dynamics of the revolution here: take libya for example, where the revolution might lead to a civil war, or even an Islamist take over. Under such circumstances things could prove worse than the devil they knew

    imagine what afghanistan would look like if the taliban took over again. or if anywhere the fundimentalists took over. there was a story a few days ago about how in libya women dont wear shorts anymore. can any of you imagine that kind of fear? and thats before any other problems happen. do you get that? more speed bumps.

    -------There is nothing wrong with a Civil war if your trying to fight off people like Gadaffi and his goons.

    see? nothing wrong with civil war. can you believe he said that? can you imagine what kind of person thinks like that? nothing wrong with peoples children dying. unless its yoru kid of course. so you would be fine with a civil war in your country where your children would be at risk? what maybe elo should have said as theres nothing wrong with other peoples children dying.

    @warren-----the entire point I just made was that people might be fighting for something *worse* than dictatorship

    he doesnt care. revolutio for the sake of revolution. he cant see the bigger picture for some reason. its one of those big idea problems that he has.
    • Re: foolishness of passivity

      Sun, November 20, 2011 - 3:51 PM
      <<i wonder if this is a drug problem or some other kind of issue?

      Yet again wtih the personalized tactic of pondering anothers personal life, and doing so in such a manner so as to insult that person. Now Elo is a drug addict? WTF Tandy?

      <<nothing wrong with peoples children dying.

      Once again with the NASTY and personalized accusatiions. Elo of course did not say there was nothing wrong with peoples children dying. He was clearly saying that a revolution to fight for freedom against a dictator is appropriate and warranted. Why do you have to exaggerate in such a nasty way?
      • Re: foolishness of passivity

        Sun, November 20, 2011 - 4:50 PM
        <nothing wrong with peoples children dying>

        there is no point in debating with stuff that seems to be emerging from sub arctic IQ levels, Tandy is if nothing else a source of amusement and amazement, but not something I should be spending much time on.
        • Re: foolishness of passivity

          Mon, November 21, 2011 - 2:20 AM
          Will people please stop trying to insult each others intelligence. It is becoming a trend in here lately. I don't see any lack of intelligence, just different opinions.
          • Re: foolishness of passivity

            Mon, November 21, 2011 - 11:22 AM
            <<Will people please stop trying to insult each others intelligence. It is becoming a trend in here lately. I don't see any lack of intelligence, just different opinions.

            Thank you Marc! :)
      • Re: foolishness of passivity

        Mon, November 21, 2011 - 11:51 AM
        @jeff-------Now Elo is a drug addict?

        now you are saying that elo is a drug addict? thats not very nice of you.

        @me-----<<nothing wrong with peoples children dying.

        @jeff---------Once again with the NASTY and personalized accusatiions.

        jeff hes the one that said this--------There is nothing wrong with a Civil war

        so you are saying that he is separating deaths in a civil war? how can you have a civil war without deaths? if theres nothing wrong with a civil war where people die then obviously he does not have a problem with peopjle dying in a civil war. he may not like it but if theres nothing wrong with civil war then the deaths that happen are part of that. you cant separate the two. maybe i dont understand how someone can say that theres nothing wrong with civil war while saying that death as the result is bad. of course death is bad but civil wars dont exist in a vacuum. people die.

        @elo-----there is no point in debating with stuff that seems to be emerging from sub arctic IQ levels,

        more insults. hypocrites.

        -----------And that some of the progressives and Islamist will start to influence each other and even merge in some cases.

        how is that even possible? how can the islamists join with the progressives? and i wonder what progressive means in egypt? no killing these apostates? just jailing them? how do you define a progressive in egypt?

        -------either it's going to become a dictatorial shit hole, or a fundamentalist shit hole; dependent on how far the army is willing to resist the public.

        thats pretty much what i think too. possibly though the military will just bribe the civilian leadership to be figureheads. there is a lot of money at stake here.

        --------But I can guarantee you the last people who are going to establish a significant presence will be the progressives. Both the military and fundies have no interest in seeing them gain any real influence

        thats so obvious.
        • Re: foolishness of passivity

          Mon, November 21, 2011 - 12:11 PM
          <<@jeff-------Now Elo is a drug addict?

          now you are saying that elo is a drug addict? thats not very nice of you. <<

          Ummm....that was YOUR nasty inference Tandy, what a disgusting thing to say.

          <<jeff hes the one that said this--------There is nothing wrong with a Civil war

          Notice that you cut off his sentence, that is called cherry picking Tandy and is a dishonest practice. You can distort his words all you like, his intention was clear, and nowhere did he indicate there is nothing wrong with children dying. Disgusting and nasty accusations such as this are a reflection on you Tandy, not Elo.

          <<so you are saying that he is separating deaths in a civil war?

          Why are you ignoring that which I already explained to you? Namely that he was speaking of civil war being justified in the name of freedom. Our own war of independence was justified, but it does not mean that it is ok for children to die. The fact that you have to mischaracterize people in such a nasty manner is really a reflection of your own character, or lack thereof. But it is a trend it seems. Accusing people of being drug addicts? Really Tandy? You are really going to sink that low?
  • Unsu...
     

    Re: foolishness of passivity

    Mon, November 21, 2011 - 10:17 PM
    Muammar Gaddafi’s fugitive spy chief, one of the last key figures from Libya’s old regime still on the run, has been captured in the country’s south. It comes just days after Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam was also caught.
    www.youtube.com/watch

Recent topics in "! * POLITICS * !"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
United Nations Launches Equality Campaign For Women with UN Se... K 12 Yesterday, 11:24 PM
Occupy Building 7 - November 19-20 Harmen 329 October 19, 2014
ISIS svetlana 19 October 18, 2014
The Climate Wars... Harmen 228 October 18, 2014